To add to the above: Ian Evans was 27 when he signed for us Paul Futcher 27 Ashley Ward 27 Ronnie Glavin 28 Craig Hignett 28 Jan Aage Floorcloth 31 Paul Wilkinson 32 Neil Thompson 33 John Hendrie 33 I want to see this kind of quality play for us again and not be ruled out because they won't make us loads of money when we sell them.
We signed him when he was over 25 and didn’t want to commit to a long term contract after 2 disappointing seasons where he scored 4 goals. I would have kept him but can understand why we didn’t.
I remember when Cryne was here you said we should always live within our means and not spend money we don’t have. The initial investment was Patrick’s in Hourihane and Winnall. We have then used some of the money raised from selling them on further signings. We have sold some of those. and so it goes. We are still investing. Probably spent the best part of a million quid ( which is massive money for L1). We have been able to reinvest money earned from the policy. If we had signed people with no resale value we wouldn’t be able to. I’d like to see more flexibility. We certainly needed experience last season. Both Brentford and on a bigger scale Southampton have worked similar projects. It’s done ok for them.
But the reason that the CEO gave for releasing him was that he was too old for our transfer policy which is absolutely bonkers. There HAS to be some deviation from the policy if the desire is success on the pitch not success in a bank account. I have no issue with selling some players if the right offer comes in but I have big issues with refusing to entertain the notion of signing players who will add value to the team purely because the owners have ascertained that they won't be able to sell them for a profit. ALL your players don't have to be bought to sell, it's also necessary to employ players for the return they will bring on the pitch otherwise we have essentially voluntarily turned ourselves into a feeder club for everyone else
Or he would not sign another contract on lower wages. All the players that are the here from last season are on lower wages.
I absolutely agree with that still. But we don't appear to be spending anywhere near what we're making from sales, which is why I ask what this policy of profit over football is giving to the fans?
The length of contract that Adam wants doesn’t fit in with our policy and I understand that. When Adam was available we made the judgement that it was worth deviating from the policy as we did for MattMills ( unfortunately) and on a loaned basis Morsy who we attempted to sign and Marty James. All clubs are feeder clubs to one extent or another. I don’t disagree with you in some ways. I’d like to see more flexibility myself ( if we get promoted). It’s completely unnecessary in L1 though.
New owners 2 players sold 1 bought and bids turned down for Moore Bradshaw Potts. Me thinks our transfer policy has changed.
Well it recently gave us probably the best 18 months in the last 20 years... this year looks like it could be fun too. It also gives us the ability to say no to poor offers for our players to maintain the academy to make ground improvements (albeit gradual). You cannot felt on always selling players so creating a buffer seems reasonable to me. If we go back up I’d like to see a slight change in approach ( higher wages and more flexibility in terms of age) but in L1 we certainly don’t need to. The difference our transfer policy has made se ms clear to me. When we got relegated last time we had to have a fire sale and start from scratch this year we don’t need to do that.
It was the use of the word investment I was questioning, not me calling for the owners to dip their hands in their pockets. We've sold £25 million+ of players over the last couple of season including sell-on clauses. We've sold another 4 of their replacements this summer, 3 of whom for the magical word profit. A local artist has painted a mural on the wall in the Ponty End, free of charge apparently (I like it a lot), and the family stand has been spruced up (also very nice apparently, although I haven't seen it) and I read on here the new owners have 'invested' in the stadium. £25 million in players sales offset against a free mural, a pool table and a big connect 4 game. It's not investment as I know it.
It gave us a year which was superb. And 18 months to follow it that was so depressing because of what could have been. We decimated a fabulous side and it was horrible to watch.
You said dismantled earlier, now decimated. That’s unfair. You can, I suppose, say the club could have done better contractually originally but there was no keeping the players who left in January 2017 or the two who left on frees later that summer.
@Jay Given you are so disgruntled at the regime and how it conducts business then can you find us someone who will run the club how you like? Throw money at it - not necessarily much - but spend and carry on spending? The owners we have won’t do this I don’t think. I am perfectly happy to have them there as a safety net to support and supplement the club’s income, and use their expertise to maximise income levels (something they can’t do much about for another year until existing sponsorship contracts expire). You want more - fair enough - but we’ve had a go at the more win or bust approach before. It didn’t end well. To be honest I’d be a bit concerned if money we didn’t have started being thrown around. The wheels can fall off very quickly. Villa nearly capitulated until they got bailed out. Wednesday are in a mess. QPR worse. Brighton rolled the dice and got lucky - they might not have. Wolves similar. Plenty more examples. We might not be more than a lower half championship club that sometimes ends up in league one for a season or two for a long time. We might get even lower in the food chain. Financially at least. We could punch above our weight and have more success. To be honest I’d sooner we function in a sound and proper fashion. It will come home to roost at some point.
I want profits to be re-invested & I think they will be. I’m not saying I’d sell him at that stage, I’m saying he’d be a sellable asset which is what we should be hoping the whole side are. For me it’s the only way we achieve success. We can’t compete by buying / giving contracts to experienced players because there’s always another club that can offer more. The only I can see us competing in the championship is to develop players so my view is that if you have a good team that you’ve developed then in order to keep most of the team through contract renewals we will have to sell a couple to cover the costs of keeping the rest of the side together. So hypothetically in 2 years time the current squad have all done really well & are still with us but we’re going to struggle to meet the contract demands of players in their last season then in theory I’d like to think we’d sell one in a position we have some depth e.g. Mowatt & then use that money to sign a couple more young, talented players & to fund contract renewals for the rest of the team. Where we’ve gone wrong in the past is losing a lot of players in one window & having to recruit a lot of players in the same window to replace them. I don’t really see another option for us to compete in the championship without losing millions each year in signing experienced players & expensive loans. We’ve been there before, I remember the end of Robins’ first season where we only had about 8 senior pro’s on the books & then again following relegation from the championship where I think we had even less. All the experienced pro’s & expensive loanees left the building & we had nothing to show for it.
I don’t think they’re ruled out because of their age & sell on value, I think they’re ruled out because of the wages we’d need to pay to sign that lot now. The games changed & unfortunately we’re further down the pecking order. There’s lots of (in my lifetime) smaller clubs now in the premier league raking in the huge TV money (Burnley, Huddersfield, Fulham, Watford, Brighton, Bournemouth etc) which has meant that the championships full of clubs with large crowds & parachute payments & we just can’t compete like we could 20 years ago. Some of the above were signed when we were in the premier league so it’s hard to compare & Glavin & Futcher are before my time but for example Craig Hignett, what would be the equivalent? Maybe Forestieri? And he’s probably on something in the £35-40k a week region. Even a Reading, QPR type club can pay £20k a week. I don’t see how we get a Hignett type unless we develop them or drop incredibly lucky scouting
I've never once said I want our owners to throw money at it. Ever. Exact opposite for years. You've got entirely the wrong idea about what I'm saying.
No it's not, it's accurate. As would be words like disassembled, deconstructed, demolished, destroyed. I'm on a ragga D tip. Everyone bar Davies has gone and they're long gone. If that wasn't the case I'd be being unfair. If we just lost a few I'd be being unfair. Every outfield player who played in those amazing games at the back end of the promotion season (4-1 v Wigan, 3-0 v Walsall, 3-1 v Walsall, 3-1 v Millwall) left the club (although Isgrove has come back). And, other than Hammill, they'd gone within a year. I know what happened with Marc Roberts. I would imagine you do too. If I'm being so unfair, let's hear that story too. The full details.
